Part 22

"Mr. HUNT said the grossest misrepresentations had been made in parliament respecting that occurrence; and he felt that it was a matter deeply to be regretted, that there was not in the House of Commons, at the time, some person who had witnessed the transaction, and who could put the House in possession of the real facts. There was a hope, however, that the present government would grant an inquiry for which he was about to apply, in conformity with the prayer of the petitions which he had just presented, and with the desire of his constituents. He proceeded to detail the circumstances under which the meeting of the Manchester reformers, at which he presided, took place. He described the horrible scene which ensued upon the dispersion of the meeting by an unprovoked and unresisted charge of the yeomanry cavalry. The House would have some notion of the violence and cruelty of the military from this fact, that when a number of men, women, and children had crowded into a small court, from which there was no thoroughfare, one of the yeomanry drove them out, whilst another struck at each of them with his sabre, as they came out. The number of persons killed on that day amounted to fifteen, while the maimed and wounded were no fewer than four hundred and twenty-four. It was true that it might be said that some of these did not suffer from the sabres of the yeomanry, but a very large proportion, he would take on himself to say, were wounded in that manner; and, at all events, it was quite certain, that no accident whatever would have occurred but for the outrageous attack that had been made on the peaceable multitude. Nor was it men alone that suffered. Women were cut down also. And were these men to be called soldiers? Was this their way of showing their high courage and their honour by cutting down _inoffensive females_? He would ask any man of humanity in that House, whether such disgraceful acts ought to be passed by unnoticed and unpunished, merely because it could be said that twelve years had elapsed since the transaction had taken place? But another excuse that perhaps might be made was, that the meeting was an illegal one. In answer to that, however, he would take on himself to say, that in his opinion, and in the opinion of those who constituted the meeting, they were as legally, aye, and as meritoriously assembled, as that House was assembled; and for as useful a purpose. No one was insulted--no tumult took place--no symptoms of riot were evinced; and yet was it for a moment to be said, that in such a country as this, where there was a continual boast of the _omnipotence of justice_, such things were to be passed over _without notice and without censure_? He could assure the House, that if this inquiry was not granted, there would be thousands of hearts rankling dissatisfied and discontented, and which could never be set at ease till _justice was awarded_. The petitioners, in whose name he was speaking, recollected that _Earl Grey_, and many of his _colleagues_, expressed, _at the time of this outrage_, a desire for an investigation into the matter. And how was that inquiry then resisted? First, by the production of official documents, emanating from the guilty party themselves; and next, by allusion to the trial at York; and the cry that the courts of justice were open to those who had any complaint to make. But the courts of justice were _not_ open; for the relations of those that were killed had gone to those courts of justice, and even there _all retribution had been denied them in the most cruel and indifferent manner_! Nor was this all. All sorts of calumnious statements were allowed to be made in the House of Commons as to the conduct of the mob, by paid spies of the government. The general presumption was, that it was the intention of the Manchester meeting, had it not been interrupted, to pass resolutions similar to those passed at Smithfield, declaratory that without a reform in parliament, taxes ought not to be paid; and he believed that that presumption was the main reason why he had been found guilty. But now, what an alteration had taken place! It was only the other day that 150,000 persons had met at Birmingham, and actually made a declaration to the same effect; and yet they were not cut down--the yeomanry had not been called out to act against them. This motion for a select committee had, in a manner, become absolutely necessary; for when he had moved for the correspondence that had taken place between Lord Sidmouth (then the secretary of state) and the lord lieutenant of the county, that correspondence had been refused; and, therefore, he had no other course to pursue than to ask for a committee for general inquiry into the whole question. Some part of Lord Sidmouth's correspondence, however, was before the public; for he had in his hand that letter of his lordship's in which he, in the name of the prince regent, thanked the magistracy for the way in which they had acted--yes, actually thanked them for having directed the execution of these COLD-BLOODED MURDERS,--by which name he must call those deeds, and by which name they were ever designated in that part of the country where they had been committed. The consequence of this letter was, that the parties, so far from shrinking abashed as they ought, actually gloried in the share they had taken in the transaction; and, in particular, he might mention that an Irishman of the name of Meagher, who was the trumpeter on that occasion, had boasted, when he returned to Ireland, that he had in one day spilled more Saxon blood than had ever been spilled by any one of his countrymen before! The real truth of the matter was, in spite of the false colouring that interested parties had endeavoured to put on it, that the meeting at Manchester was neither more nor less than a reform meeting, that every thing was going on peaceably, that not even so much as a pane of glass was broken, and though the government took the trouble to send Messrs. Oliver and Castles among the people to corrupt them, they were not able to succeed in their virtuous endeavours. As to his own personal feeling on the subject, he was quite willing to remember that twelve years had elapsed, and in that recollection to drown the memory of all he had himself suffered in consequence of the transactions of that day. It was enough for him, when he recollected the object of that meeting, to see the noble lord introduce such a measure of reform as he had never expected to see any government in this country introduce; and which, though it did not go the length that he could have desired, fully admitted the allegation, that the present House of Commons was not chosen by the people,--the allegation on which he had all along built his own proposition of reform. This, he repeated, was quite enough to wipe away any personal resentment that he might ever have felt. But if not--if he still were vindictive--what revenge might he not find in the events that had since taken place! Who was the prime minister of that day? The Earl of Liverpool! And where was the Earl of Liverpool? Who were the principal officers of state of that day? Lord Sidmouth, Mr. Canning, and Lord Castlereagh! Of these, Lord Sidmouth alone remained; and where was Mr. Canning? Where Lord Castlereagh, and how did he go out of the world? A remarkable fact it was, that two years afterwards, on the very anniversary of that fatal 16th of August, while he was lying in prison, the very first letter that he opened detailed to him the end of that minister. Who was the reigning prince of that day?--George the Fourth--where was he? They had all gone to answer for their deeds at a tribunal where no jury could be packed, where no evidence could be stifled, and where unerring justice would be meted out to them! To carry this further, if it needed it, he might mention that two of those very yeomanry committed suicide on the very anniversary of the 16th of August, and many were now to be seen walking about the streets of Manchester, objects of a horrid pity. He would not say that all this was a just judgment on these participators in the murders of Manchester: but one might almost fancy, that though a House of Commons could not be found to deal out impartial justice, there was still a wise Providence over all, which, by its interference, had taken care not to let the guilty escape; and, as a climax to the whole, he hoped to live to see the day when the noble lord who yet lived should be brought to the bar of justice for having sent Castles, and Edwards, and Oliver, as spies, for the purpose of instigating the peaceful people to revolt. Nor was this all. Other retribution had taken place; the government of that day and its friends had not only countenanced this destruction of the people for the sake of shewing their enmity to reform, but had actually undertaken a continental war with the same objects in view; and yet now those very persons saw a reform taking place in spite of themselves, and had even been condemned unsuccessfully to battle its progress night after night in that House. He would say this too, that if this committee of inquiry should be refused, and if he should live a few years longer, he did not doubt that he should see the day arrive when a much heavier retaliation, in another way, would take place. He himself desired no such thing; but was it in the character of human nature that persons who had been so deeply injured should sit down quiet and satisfied, when every thing in the shape of redress was denied them? But he trusted that the government would not refuse this motion for inquiry; should, however, such a refusal be given, he should feel it to be his duty to bring the question again and again before the country, as often as the forms of the House would allow. In making his proposition to the House, he had not provided himself with a seconder; but, after what had taken place, he would call on the noble Chancellor of the Exchequer to second the motion. The noble lord had, twelve years ago, pretty freely expressed his opinion as to the transaction; and, he presumed, that that opinion had not been altered by the lapse of time. The laws of England and of every country had always been unanimous in expressing their abhorrence of the crime of murder; and it was because he charged those parties with being guilty of a deliberate and cold-blooded murder that he demanded an inquiry, in the name of justice and retribution."

We offer no apology for introducing this eloquent and manly appeal in behalf of long-delayed justice. The popularity or unpopularity of Mr. Hunt forms no consideration in our minds; nay, even if the Duke of Cumberland himself (much as we loathe his character!) had been its author, it should still have found a place in our volume. How the ministers could reconcile it with their duty, both to God and man, to _refuse_ the inquiry, we are at a loss to determine, particularly as each of them formerly expressed a desire for it! It is really astonishing with what different eyes men see things when in office and when toiling to get in!

In the October of this year, the Princess of Wales removed to Marseilles, weary of the attempts to traduce and insult her character by hirelings from the English court. A friend of our's had the pleasure of enjoying her royal highness' confidence at this period, and, after her removal to Marseilles, the persecuted Caroline made the following observations: "What could I do, when I found such base attempts made to destroy my reputation by the most disreputable characters? I left Milan, and I have carefully preserved a journal of each day's history, which, upon perusal, will do much more than _merely satisfy_ the nation, to which my heart so fondly clings." "I wished," added the princess, "very ardently to have gone to England in the early part of this year, and I had resolved to do so; but my legal advisers prevented me, expressing their opinion that they should see me first." It is a fact that the interview with Mr. Brougham, so much desired in April, 1819, was not granted until a later period in 1820! Might not an earlier arrangement than this very probably have put the enemy to flight? The princess was not ignorant of the demise of the king, as we have before stated; and the source from which her royal highness received that information was too worthy of reliance to be doubted. Yet, being bound in honour to conceal the information and informant, both were kept in profound silence. It was generally supposed, however, that this event had taken place, because no man, afflicted as his majesty was said to be, could possibly exist for any lengthened period. But in the then art of governing, there were frequently many circumstances which were highly necessary to be concealed from the knowledge of the people. That precious trio, Sidmouth, Castlereagh, and Canning, environed the throne, and their dictatorial will was soon converted into law. Under their auspices, the already enormous standing army was still increased; while, like the tyrannical son of Philip, when he reprimanded Aristotle for publishing his discoveries, they whispered to their myrmidons, "Let us diffuse darkness round the land. Let the people be kept in a brutal state. Let their conduct, when assembled, be riotous and irrational as ignorance and _our spies_ can make it, that they may be brought into discredit, and deemed unfit for the management of their own affairs. Let power be rendered dangerous in their hands, that it may continue unmolested in our own. Let them not taste the fruit of the tree of knowledge, lest they become as wise as ourselves!" Such were the political sentiments of those at the head of affairs at this period;--how successfully they acted upon them is too well known.

The session opened in November, and never did ministers commit themselves more than by the speech then put into the mouth of the regent. It contained little else than vindictive sentiments, breathing vengeance on all who dared oppose the "powers that be," but seemed utterly forgetful of this good advice, "It is the sovereign's duty to ease with mercy's oil the sufferer's heart."

The infamous and notorious "Six Acts" were introduced this session by "the Oppressors," the principal object of which was to impose further restrictions on the freedom of the press. This plan was considered likely to be the most successful, as well as the most insidious, mode of abolishing the few liberties remaining to Englishmen. Ministers thus thought to leave the FORM of our dearest safeguard untouched, and so gradually annihilate its ESSENCE. The voracious worm eats out the kernel completely, while the husk continues fair to the eye, and apparently entire. The husbandman would crush the insect, if it commenced the attack on the external tegument; but it carries on the work of destruction with efficacy and safety, while it corrodes the unseen fruit, and spares the outside shell. At this despotic period, the press was erected as a battery by the people to defend the almost vanquished citadel of their liberty; but, by these acts, Castlereagh, instead of attacking this citadel, opened the dams, locks, and flood-gates, so that the waters might secretly undermine its foundation, when he hoped to see it fall ingloriously into the hands of its enemies. While these base deeds were being accomplished, no thoughts were bestowed upon the people's wretchedness, which stood in dread array against ministerial imbecility. Indeed, the servile papers in the pay of government not only stoutly denied that such distress existed, but made the grossest attempts to impose on the public credulity. Let any one read such papers of the period we are speaking, if the employment be not too nauseous, and they will there see KNOWN FACTS, if they militated against the credit of the voluptuous regent, or his government, either DOUBTED or DENIED; uncertain victories extolled beyond all resemblance to truth; and defeats, in the highest degree disgraceful and injurious, artfully extenuated. Notwithstanding all this effrontery and falsehood, the "Six Acts" were still thought necessary to gag that which corruption and bribery could not render quite inefficient in the cause of truth. While contemplating such acts of tyranny, we are led to exclaim with Cato, when seeking out the little barren spot of Utica, "Wherever there is a regard for LIBERTY, JUSTICE, and HUMANITY, there will we gladly take up our abode; for there we shall find a country and a home!"

The extraordinary events that occurred in the year

1820

are so closely interwoven with the weal and wo of the British people, that it may be considered as one of the most serious periods in English history.

On the 15th of January, the Duke of Kent became indisposed with a severe cold. On the 17th of the same month, it was reported, "that his royal highness' illness had assumed most alarming symptoms;" and Sir David Dundas went off expressly to Sidmouth to attend his royal highness. The duke's disorder increased, and at half-past one, P. M., January 23rd, this prince was deprived of his mortal existence, in the fifty-third year of his age. But a few days before, his royal highness was in good health, and in the prime of life! The public will one day be made acquainted with the particulars of the REAL CAUSE of his death. At present, we shall only observe, that his royal highness was too virtuous to be allowed to live long in a vicious court!

The public journals dwelt with much force upon the kind attentions and tender offices performed by the duchess, which, if true, were only what every good wife ought to have done. Who can be nearer to a wife than her husband? and what lady of feeling and integrity would not blush to be negligent in the best services and the most unwearied attentions to the ordained partner of her life? Royalty, however, has so many and such peculiar privileges, that what is considered _wonderous grace_ with them is merely thought _common decency_ in the vulgar part of Adam's offspring.

About this time, the king's health was stated to be "very much on the decline," (hypocrisy!) and the journals announced "that George the Third expired without a struggle, on the 29th of January, in the eighty-second year of his age, and the sixtieth of his reign." But we have the gratification of setting history right in this particular. Of course, the letters and notices of this intelligence were immediately forwarded by the appointed messengers to the several foreign courts. It would be unnecessary for us here to offer any remark upon the character of George the Third, as we have previously noticed the origin of that unhappy disease which so lamentably afflicted him during the latter years of his truly unfortunate life. His majesty bequeathed a sum of money to each of his sons; but George the Fourth thought proper to withhold the Duke of Sussex's portion. This unjust act was the primary cause of the quarrel between these royal brothers, which lasted till the death of George the Fourth. But, as "kings can do no wrong," little was thought of his majesty's dishonesty. Monarchs are aware of their privileges, and have, therefore, in many instances, not scrupled to commit the most heinous crimes. His late majesty was one of this kind, and yet he was called "His most gracious, religious, and benevolent majesty!" What a profanation of terms were these!

As a necessary preliminary to a new reign, George the Fourth was proclaimed in London on the 31st of the same month.

In February, a _pretended_ mysterious political plot was publicly adverted to, by the name of "The Cato-street Conspiracy." It was said that information having been received at Bow-street, that a meeting of armed persons was to be held at a house in Cato-street, Mary-la-bonne, and, as the magistrates feared something serious would be the result, they forwarded a formidable body of their officers to the place. On the arrival of these persons, they found the number of men amounted to thirty, armed with guns, swords, daggers, and other weapons, and appeared ready to leave the place, which was a hayloft at the top of the house. The officers demanded an entrance, which was refused. Captain Fitzclarence then arrived, with a party of the guards, and a scene of much violence ensued. Some of the party were taken to Bow-street, which was lined with soldiers. The result proved serious to a police officer, named Smythers, who was stabbed in the affray, which produced his death; and it was sworn, that Arthur Thistlewood inflicted the wound.

This heart-rending tragedy was generally thought to have been produced by _government spies_; indeed, several newspapers stated as much at the time. We, however, KNOW such to have been the case, and that the characters of "blood-hounds" were but too well performed. Our bosoms swell with indignation at the recollection of such monstrous plots against the lives and liberties of our countrymen, and we regret that the plotters did not fall into their own snares.

On the morning after this lamentable occurrence, a "Gazette Extraordinary" was issued, signed "SIDMOUTH," offering one thousand pounds for the detection of Arthur Thistlewood, who stood charged with the crime of high treason. The reward had the desired effect, as he was soon apprehended. Three of his companions were afterwards taken, and FIVE MARTYRS, in all, suffered as traitors on the 1st of May.

Let us not, in common with hirelings, talk of the "wisdom of ministers," and the "bravery of the guards," combined with the several loathsome execrations on artificers and agriculturists; but let us inquire, is there no resemblance to be observed between this conspiracy and the Manchester massacre? The intelligent reader will not find the similarity difficult to trace.